Using Convergent Parallel Mixed Methods and Datasets for Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy Dynamics Research in Indonesia


Analysis techniques
Data collection
Mixed methods
Research designs
STI policy


The application of mixed methods has been widely implemented in several studies, particularly in the field of public policy; however, the implementation of convergent parallel mixed methods has been limited. Thus, such methods are appropriate to reveal the science, technology, and innovation (STI) policy dynamics in Indonesia during the 1945–2020 period, as policy dynamics research attempts to reveal the evolution of the changes regarding the policy itself. The following five concepts are analyzed through convergent parallel mixed methods: 1) regime/government change, 2) institutional change/transformation, 3) change in policy issuance, direction, and content, 4) actor role and existence, and 5) policy object input and output. This article discusses the method details, from the paradigm, research dataset, and technique selection for collecting and analyzing research data to the research implementation.


Bardach E. 2011. Policy Dynamics. Oxford University Press. [accessed 2022 Aug 9].

Brierley JA. 2017. The role of a pragmatist paradigm when adopting mixed methods in behavioural accounting research. IJBAF. 6(2):140. doi:10.1504/IJBAF.2017.086432.

Colson AR, Cooke RM. 2018. Expert Elicitation: Using the Classical Model to Validate Experts’ Judgments. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy. 12(1):113–132. doi:10.1093/reep/rex022.

Creswell JW. 2014. Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL. 2011. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 2nd ed. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.

Dale A, Wathan J, Higgins V. 2008. Secondary Analysis of Quantitative Data Sources. In: Alasuutari P, Bickman L, Brannen J, editors. The SAGE Handbook of Social Research Methods. London, United Kingdom: SAGE Publications Ltd. p. 520–535. [accessed 2022 Aug 9].

van Eck NJ, Waltman L. 2011. Text mining and visualization using VOSviewer. [accessed 2022 Aug 9].

Heaton J. 2004. Reworking qualitative data. London?; Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE.

Heaton J. 2012. Secondary analysis of qualitative data. In: Alasuutari P, Bickman L, Brannen J, editors. The SAGE handbook of social research methods. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. p. 506–519.

Hendren K, Luo QE, Pandey SK. 2018. The State of Mixed Methods Research in Public Administration and Public Policy: The State of Mixed Methods Research in Public Administration and Public Policy. Public Admin Rev. 78(6):904–916. doi:10.1111/puar.12981.

Howlett M, Ramesh M. 2003. Studying public policy: policy cycles and policy subsystems. Toronto?; New York: Oxford University Press.

Kuhn TS, Hacking I. 2012. The structure of scientific revolutions. Fourth edition. Chicago?; London: The University of Chicago Press.

Li F, Butel L, Wang P. 2017. Innovation policy configuration – a comparative study of Russia and China. Policy Studies. 38(4):311–338. doi:10.1080/01442872.2017.1308477.

Li X, Pak C, Bi K. 2020. Analysis of the development trends and innovation characteristics of Internet of Things technology – based on patentometrics and bibliometrics. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management. 32(1):104–118. doi:10.1080/09537325.2019.1636960.

Lukman, Rianto Y. 2019. Pengukuran kinerja riset: teori dan implementasi. Cetakan pertama. Jakarta: LIPI Press.

Lupton D. 2020. Doing fieldwork in a pandemic (crowd sourced document).

Morgan DL. 2007. Paradigms Lost and Pragmatism Regained: Methodological Implications of Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research. 1(1):48–76. doi:10.1177/2345678906292462.

Ocean Nexus Center. 2020. Adapting methodologies in the covid-19 pandemic: Resources for researchers.

Oswald FL, Putka DJ. 2017. Big data methods in the social sciences. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences. 18:103–106. doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2017.10.006.

Putera PB. 2012. Perspektif Sistem Inovasi Dalam Konten Kebijakan Daerah Jawa Timur Bidang Iptek dan Inovasi Periode 2000-2011. Warta Kebijakan dan Manajemen Litbang. 10(2):83–98. doi:10.14203/STIPM.2012.2.

Putera PB, Suryanto S, Ningrum S, Widianingsih I, Rianto Y. 2022. Increased number of Scopus articles from Indonesia from 1945 to 2020, an analysis of international collaboration, and a comparison with other ASEAN countries from 2016 to 2020. Sci Ed. 9(1):62–68. doi:10.6087/kcse.265.

Singh GG, Hilmi N, Bernhardt JR, Cisneros Montemayor AM, Cashion M, Ota Y, Acar S, Brown JM, Cottrell R, Djoundourian S, et al. 2019. Climate impacts on the ocean are making the Sustainable Development Goals a moving target travelling away from us. Ban N, editor. People and Nature. 1(3):317–330. doi:10.1002/pan3.26.

Tight M. 2019a. Documentary Research in the Social Sciences. 1 Oliver’s Yard, 55 City Road London EC1Y 1SP: SAGE Publications Ltd. [accessed 2022 Aug 9].

Tight M. 2019b. Policy Research. In: Tight M, editor. Documentary research in the social sciences. New York: SAGE Publications Ltd. p. 121–132.

Tight M. 2019c. Secondary Data Research. In: Tight M, editor. Documentary Research in the Social Sciences. New York: SAGE Publications Ltd. p. 95–108.

Varvasovszky Z. 2000. A stakeholder analysis. Health Policy and Planning. 15(3):338–345. doi:10.1093/heapol/15.3.338.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2022 The Author(s)


Download data is not yet available.